Tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in animal farming and its impact on public health is a key priority for EFSA and other public health authorities in Europe. This study is a contribution to the joint effort by EFSA and EU member state authorities to address the issue. Focusing on the EU farming sector, it documents perceptions of the risks of AMR, associated behaviours, and the reasons and rationales behind them. Consumers, veterinarians and (pig and poultry) farmers in a sample of European countries were surveyed using a combination of methods (online survey, semi-structured interviews). The evidence gathered can inform communication strategies at national and EU level to increase awareness where these are designed to inform risk perception and change behaviours in relation to the use of antibiotics in animal farming and antibiotics' impact on human health. © ICF, 2017

Emerging risks are defined by EFSA as risks "resulting from a newly identified hazard to which a significant exposure may occur or from an unexpected new or increased significant exposure and/or susceptibility to a known hazard". Communicating about emerging risks can be challenging, as these risks are associated with significant levels of uncertainty and ambiguity. The aim of this study was to better understand the views of EU consumers on food related emerging risks, so as to inform future communication activities around emerging risks at EFSA and Member State National Competent Authorities. To address these aims, a consumer survey was delivered in 25 EU countries (N=6268). The survey investigated consumer knowledge and concerns about emerging risks, as well as consumer needs and preferences with regard to emerging risk communication. The survey used three examples of emerging risks: green smoothies, plastic rice, and nanotechnologies. Survey findings have been analysed in the context of literature on emerging risks, and recommendations drawn for risk communicators at EFSA and the National Competent Authorities. The evidence suggests that emerging risks differed from established risks in various ways. However, it did not indicate that emerging risks triggered significantly greater levels of concern than established risks. Rather, the study found that consumers tended to be more concerned about established risks than about emerging risks. Food fraud was of greater concern to consumers than other types of emerging risks. The study documented a lack of knowledge about the emerging risks used in the survey, and an appetite for information about emerging risks more generally, irrespective of the extent of the uncertainty. The evidence suggests also that communicating information about the nature of the risk and the level of uncertainty that surrounds it may have a significant impact on risk perception, pointing to the malleability of perceptions of emerging risks. © EFSA, 2018

This report presents the results from an exploratory study in 2016 on clear communication of scientific assessment results. It had a specific focus on the communication of scientific uncertainties in EFSA scientific opinions. Qualitative methods were applied to the design and communication of an opinion summary and uncertainty statements related to that opinion, and to collect evidence on how different stakeholder groups responded to them. The study tested the Clear Communication Index (CCI) tool, using it to elaborate a simplified opinion summary and then seeking stakeholder views on the latter. The study then focused on stakeholder views on uncertainty statements, and particularly on (i) whether and how the information was understood, (ii) how uncertainty information influenced risk perceptions and (iii) confidence in EFSA, and (iv) which uncertainty information was useful to stakeholders and how. The study as a whole involved the use of desk research, questionnaires, and focus groups. It engaged representatives of five stakeholder groups -political decision-makers, technical decision-makers, industry, NGOs, and the informed public. Findings indicate that the CCI tool/approach may be applicable to EFSA's communication materials and may help improve clarity of message. The study provided insights on uncertainty communication at EFSA and how it may be received, understood, and used by EFSA's audiences. Given the exploratory nature of the study, further research with larger samples of consultees is needed to assess the generalizability of those insights.

EFSA defines ‘chemical mixtures’ as ‘several substances which may have combined effects on the body from their combined exposures’. There are already some methodologies for assessing risks from combined exposure to groups of chemicals, and EFSA together with European partners is developing methodologies to assess the risk from exposure to combinations of chemicals in food. However, consumers' understanding and views on this topic have not been documented. This poses significant challenges to communication for EFSA and Member State authorities. To address this gap, a study on consumer views and perceptions was conducted. The study has followed a mixed method approach consisting of desk research, an online survey of EU citizens, a focus group with Belgian consumers, and a campaign of qualitative interviews with journalists. The consumer survey and focus group explored consumer knowledge and concerns about chemical mixtures, and reactions to different wordings and messages associated with chemical mixtures. Interviews with media representatives explored wording and messages to communicate about chemical mixtures and preferred ways of receiving information on chemical mixtures from EU bodies. Study findings indicate that consumer are well‐aware of man‐made chemicals, but less so of naturally‐occurring chemicals. Consumers also have low awareness of chemical mixtures and the risk assessment process. Their level of concern from being exposed to combined effects of chemicals in food is high. Findings suggest that risk perceptions on this matter are influenced by the general perception that chemicals are man‐made and therefore pose a greater risk to human health than other substances or products considered natural. There were country differences in the way the choice of wording impacted consumer perceptions, which can inform tailored approaches to communication

EFSA commissioned this study to determine the impact of science grant and procurement projects, signed in 2009-2012, on delivery of EFSA's tasks. The results of the review will be used by EFSA to draw conclusions with regard to grant and procurement project implementation in the past and formulate recommendations for outsourcing scientific work in the future. The research undertaken for the review included document review, consultations and benchmarking of six European Union institutions. The main purpose of science grant and procurement projects is to support EFSA in the delivery of its scientific tasks. The study findings show that EFSA science projects were frequently and widely used in EFSA scientific outputs. The study findings also demonstrate that the science projects made a positive contribution to scientific risk assessment practices in EFSA during the study period and to EFSA's own capacity to respond to the mandates it was given. There was a strong networking and cooperation benefit from science projects for both beneficiaries and contractors. The study results suggest that EFSA could increase the impact of its grant and procurement projects through wider dissemination of project outputs. As compared to procurement projects, grant projects have a greater potential to contribute to EFSA's objectives of supporting capacity building, cooperation and networking, and to the development of scientific knowledge that is of more general application in EFSA's work. The impact of EFSA's science spending with regard to these objectives could be increased by greater use of longer term, larger research (grant-funded) projects focused on topics EFSA identifies as strategic knowledge gaps that are particularly relevant to its work. EFSA could make improvements to its commissioning processes and the monitoring systems used for its science projects which could result in higher response rates to calls for proposals and better management information on proposal and project quality.